Print Thread
The future of Superman.
Man_Of_Steel_
We all know that DC and Warner Bros will lose the rights to Superman in 2013. So, we can speculate about what that means for the future of the Man of Steel. So go ahead! Now, Man of Steel is going to begin production soon. If the film is a success what will that mean for the heirs of Seigel and Shuster's cases?
It's a bird, it's a plane, it's Superman.
 
GaryFreeman1987
I think they should cancel all Superman comics after 2012. That way when the Siegal's win, there is less chance they'll feel like they're actually getting anything. If they want the property, let them have it. The fans won't miss it anyway, not from what I see every time I visit this site. There is nothing but hatred for what is being done with the character, so I say it's time to have a comic book series finale for Superman and let the character die.
Superman doesn't drink, he doesn't smoke, he doesn't cuss, he doesn't throw cellophane S's at people, he can't wipe people's memories with a kiss, he can't rewind time by flying around the Earth.

But I guess I'm not a true fan because I don't worship outdated films.
 
Man_Of_Steel_
I highly doubt that all Superman comics will be cancelled. I just want to know what lies ahead for the character. And what we will end up seeing after the dust settles.
It's a bird, it's a plane, it's Superman.
 
Doug22
What will happen?

First off I think DC/WB should be bold and kill-off the Superman character. His defeat coming in dramatic fashion, as it should, as he falls at his enemy's feet while saving the Earth for one final time.

Clearly however WB/DC are trying to create a "new" Superman based on the portion of the rights they will retain.

The problem with this however is that no matter what WB/DC does the heirs will sue after 2012. Any effort to continue the character will be challeneged by lawsuit. And visa versa for WB/DC.

So indeed the books will cease publication after 2012 because the legal situation will basically be frozen in place till a resolution. On something like this you are talking 5 - 10 years before a legal resolution and a potential resumption of the books or films.

There will not be a sequel to Man of Steel for these very same legal reasons. The heirs will sue and they'd win easilly if Clark or Lois or other things that are a part of the MOS film are used in a sequel. So it wouldn't be a sequel anyway.

In any event WB is only making the MOS film as the court ordered them to do so before the end of 2012 or they'd be liable for tens of millions in damages to the heirs. WB ain't planning sequels from everything I see.
 
Fulcon
What elements of the Superman lore do the heirs own, anyway?
You know, the reason I like Superman is because he is an unabashed good guy, not this angsting dude with an anguished past who kills people while angsting.

It's time to show people why Light and Bright Heroes are awesome again.

----------

Your mission: Draw a picture of a crossover between the cast of Superman: Returns and the cast of Smallville.

How would the two cast's interact?

PM me when you have succeeded.
 
AKalel
Who says DC/WB lose rights. I have a feeling things will still go one because of the fact the case is still on trial. I think things might be scaled back to a certain extent but will not be stopped completely.
 
copacetic
We might see a twin line of Superman comics, way things are going - a DC line and a S/S line. The Siegels/Schusters may either shop the character out to indie publishers (highly unlikely) or put out their own line, with the version of Superman they secured. OR they may just be entitled to royalties every time DC uses any aspects of the character and its associated universe for which the two families have won a claim.
 
Chiptooth

>Fulcon wrote:


What elements of the Superman lore do the heirs own, anyway?


I could be wrong, but from what I understand, they'd own Clark Kent, Lois Lane, the suit as it originally appeared, and Krypton and him coming from it.

So the way I figure it, in order to subvert the lawsuit by any measure, DC would have to come up with a Superman who isn't a Kent nor a newspaper reporter, doesn't love a woman named Lois nor any girl named Lane, isn't from Krypton (which would also potentially affect Supergirl - notice Krypton's not even mentioned in her book's solicitation), and doesn't wear the blue tights that the character has worn for 70 years.

The latter, I suppose, would probably explain the weird, seamed McG/Abrams-era suit design with the high collar, at least to an extent - but what DC/Warner IS potentially losing is stuff that's really at the heart of the mythos that even people who don't read comic books have known (and loved by some, I'm sure) about Superman for the past seven decades.

Personally, if DC is that desperate to keep printing Superman comics (which I'm sure they are given the licensed-merchandise dollars at stake) and bury Siegel and Shuster's contributions as much as possible, IMO they'd do better just to canonize, with whatever retcons are necessary, "Whatever Happened To The Man Of Tomorrow?" as the OFFICIAL ending for the Clark Kent version of Superman as far as DC is concerned (since they've already killed him off once, plus they've already re-introduced so much of Pre-Crisis Superman that to me it seems like a logical step toward sending him off for good), have Lois conveniently change her name (and vocation) as well as that of her husband, and put former-genetic-experiment Kon-El in that newfangled suit as their "adopted nephew" Conner Elliott, who's a car mechanic like his uncle Jordy - he already fits the 'younger' image they want for the character; as for Supergirl, since DC obviously has it in for the Linda Danvers version of the character too much to bother bringing her back in any clear or reasonable form, just take a page from "No Man's Land" and adapt/retcon in the DCAU version from a planet that isn't Krypton.

Yeah, OK, seriously, I know it's not that simple, but what the hey.

Edited by Chiptooth on 21/06/2011 21:57


http://jochimus.deviantart.com/
 
Hypoxic
Remember, too, that issues only effect the United States copyright. Potentially, DC could release Superman related material internationally, but not in the US, and still be a-okay. I can see it now, a wave of American fans storming Canadian comic book shops every Wednesday!

I'm unsure how this really works though, since much of the info regarding the entire trial is terribly convoluted.
Easy, miss. I've got you.
_____

Get away from me, padre. You reek of the irrational. - Lex Luthor
 
LovelyLanaLang

>Man_Of_Steel_ wrote:


We all know that DC and Warner Bros will lose the rights to Superman in 2013. So, we can speculate about what that means for the future of the Man of Steel. So go ahead! Now, Man of Steel is going to begin production soon. If the film is a success what will that mean for the heirs of Seigel and Shuster's cases?


It doesn't matter. Siegel own the half of the copyright.

Siegel won their portion in 2008. They will own Superman rights in 2013. The movie has nothing to do with the case, actually.

Now, Shuster heirs is still continuing. They may terminate their deal but Joe Shuster don't have an heir. Only an heir can terminate. His nephew don't count.

It may possible that DC still keep Superman copyrights but we have to find out.
 
Hypoxic

>LovelyLanaLang wrote:


The movie has nothing to do with the case, actually.


It has lots to do with the case, actually. The court ruled that the Siegel estate was not entitled to any further royalties, but if a film doesn't enter production before 2011 is out the Siegel estate can open a lawsuit for lost royalties. It's thoroughly odd.
Easy, miss. I've got you.
_____

Get away from me, padre. You reek of the irrational. - Lex Luthor
 
Cappy
All that's going to happen is, DC/WB is going to have to pay the heirs. That's it. If they have any business sense, the heirs aren't going to try and rip Superman apart, as they will be unable to profit from a butchered franchise. And really, that's all this is about: money. If they gave a damn about Superman, about what Jerry and Joe created, they'd leave him be, and let him fly. And even if they don't, what choice do they have?
 
Hypoxic

>Cappy wrote:


All that's going to happen is, DC/WB is going to have to pay the heirs. That's it. If they have any business sense, the heirs aren't going to try and rip Superman apart, as they will be unable to profit from a butchered franchise. And really, that's all this is about: money. If they gave a damn about Superman, about what Jerry and Joe created, they'd leave him be, and let him fly. And even if they don't, what choice do they have?


Indeed. Superman is the nest egg of the estates. I think it would be odd for the estates to take things to the edge where the character may just fall, and that nice little nest egg will be little more than goo on the rocks.
Easy, miss. I've got you.
_____

Get away from me, padre. You reek of the irrational. - Lex Luthor
 
maximara

>Chiptooth wrote:


>Fulcon wrote:


What elements of the Superman lore do the heirs own, anyway?


I could be wrong, but from what I understand, they'd own Clark Kent, Lois Lane, the suit as it originally appeared, and Krypton and him coming from it.

So the way I figure it, in order to subvert the lawsuit by any measure, DC would have to come up with a Superman who isn't a Kent nor a newspaper reporter, doesn't love a woman named Lois nor any girl named Lane, isn't from Krypton (which would also potentially affect Supergirl - notice Krypton's not even mentioned in her book's solicitation), and doesn't wear the blue tights that the character has worn for 70 years.


The ironic thing here is National Comics Publications v. Fawcett Publications 191 F.2d 594 (2d Cir. 1951) means that the Superman copyright is far more than just the name, place of origin, or supporting cast.

Remember that Captain Marvel whose secret identity was a boy who was a radio reporter was ruled to be a possible "illegal copy" of Superman based on specific stories or super feats and given the way DC keeps recycling stories they could quickly run afoul of that ruling.
 
Doug22
Reading film and comic sites since the GL film disappointment it seems like WB isalready preparing for a world without Superman.

After 2012 the only viable film franchise WB has is Batman (comic franchise that is). GL was expected to become another Ironman and WB would replace the lost Superman franchise with GL. it's why they spent so much. As much as they did on SR.

GL underperformed. It sounds like the options now at WB are shifting to a JL film for 2013 featuring Batman and I guess Flash, GL and WW. WB trying to launch the characters that way.

Or, I've seen speculation, a Batman/GL or Batman/Flash or whatever film to again try to launch another character into success besides Batman.
a
So that reinforces the impression that WB expects to at worst lose Superman in another year or so or at best have the issue up in the air still. And being blocked from doing anything Superman.

I've read speculation that Snyder could promote MOS as the last Superman film. That would certainly boost te BO. I think they'll only do this, if they do, at the last minute as by fall 2012 WB will know for sure if they've lost Superman.

The reboot is a clear attempt to make a new character that gets around the heirs' rights. Who knows if it will work. You can be sure the heirs will sue if DC publishes this new version of Supes in 2013.

I read a post somewhere to watch for Lois to disappear from the new Superman tiltes before the end of 2012, for Superman to be injured in battle and lose some of his powers permanently which will explain the need f armor on the new suit and after Lois's death to renounce his Clark secret identity and move on in another way. Sounds like a plan - assuming DC even wants to try to continu with an abbreviated character after 2012.

Edited by Doug22 on 30/06/2011 14:56

 
Whogaman
I don't know if this has been discussed here yet, but I think the reboot of Superman is a preemptive strike because of the lawsuit. If DC/WB doesn't settle with the Shuster and Siegel heirs, then the relaunch will forever change Superman.

And I base this on the first look at Superboy: [img]http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lmjwg7coPw1qh517go1_500.jpg[/img] is not a valid Image.

Now it has been stated that Superman will be younger than he is now, so could this be 'the adventures of Superman when he was a boy'? If this is a relaunch of Superman with no Krypton, Clark Kent, Lois Lane, it stands to reason, at least to me, that a new and different origin story must be written as to not to infringe on the changing copyright of Superman.

It's just my idea, but from the video on Bleeding Cool, http://www.bleedi...-berganza/ it just might have a point.

I will wait and see.

Peace Whoga
[img]https://scontent-b-pao.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/v/1543679_624694037566834_909789152_n.jpg?oh=448b277b52c10f94d290f54275a18dc1&oe=52D8C0FD[/img]=====================================
"Like the only real magic -- The magic of knowledge."
 
baalroo
Action Comics will be dealing with his "origin" and the regular Superman book will be in current continuity. Superboy is still Conner.
 
Doug22

>Whogaman wrote:


I don't know if this has been discussed here yet, but I think the reboot of Superman is a preemptive strike because of the lawsuit. If DC/WB doesn't settle with the Shuster and Siegel heirs, then the relaunch will forever change Superman.


Peace Whoga


That seems to be the general consensus on comic book sites and such.

The reboot is the initial step in WB creating a new non-Superman character using the portion of the rights they will retain.

As I said I've seen some speculation as we get towards the end of 2012 and the clock is running they will kill Lois an Jimmy off or have them disappear.

Maybe after a battle between lex and Superman where Lex uses modified kryptonite (a la gold K) to permanetly rob Superman of some of his powers. He loses his invulnerability which may explain the new amored suit they are using in the reboot. He loses those powers that DC doesn't own anymore.

Ma Kent dies.

Superman is despondent and decides to end his Clark Kent and Superman persona. Let the world think Lex has killed Superman. He then starts over with a new persona and a new name Man of Steel and a new secret identity and origin.

It's clearly DC and WB's hope to be able to salvage something out of this.

Lawyers being what they are however you can expct that no matter how DC tries to carry on a Superman-like character the heirs and Toberoff will file lawsuit after lawsuit.

The franchise will IMO be dead in the water after 2012 and we won't see any resolution for years to come.
 
AKalel
I think the big issue is how much money the heirs will get not just in the short term but on a ongoing basis. The reason i state this is as some have sort of stated for lack of a better term the Superman franchise is a money maker and I think as long as the powers that be and the heirs come up a worth while figure nothing will change. Also by cutting it apart things are risked in regards to limiting who might still be interested.
 
Doug22
Fans keep thinking there will a settlement but increasingly it looks like that is not going to happen.

Plus DC's strategy to reboot Superman and keep publishing their version of the character looks legally dubious.

Below is an interesting article by a lawyer on this.

I've always said this will go the the Supreme Court which will take years. And that Superman will be frozen from being used for years to come after mid-2013.

The article pretty much aligns with this. Not at all encouraging news for the future of Superman. Even the worst case split talked about wiill not work as both sides will sue the other for infringement. Which is why I think the Court will order no one to use Superman until the SCOTUS rules on this.

http://www.comics...-superman/
 
Jump to Forum: